http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22548065

There should be set guidelines and then liasion with the DPP if in any doubt. At the very least your name shouldn't be in the press until you reach court.

It would also close a gap for the police to tip off the press as they are arresting someone.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

Nameless until charged IMO. At that point the justice system need to be transparent. That goes for the accuser as well add the accused.

I do think in the cases of rape that it is a hard choice to name the accused when there is little evidence of any crime. There have been cases of women claiming rape when nothing of the sort happened. Then the man is dragged through the courts and if acquitted his reputation is ruined, and the accusation will stay on the police computer for life. When he could be a victim of a lying woman. If there is a way to expunge any such record if it is later found to be that the woman lied then that can redress the accused.

In terms of most crimes I do think that anonymity should be the preference.

If there is little evidence then they shouldn't be charged.

THere needs to be some evidence to show a judge that there are reasonable grounds for arrest - unless it's an immediate thing such as crime in progress.

I agree that there should be anonymity until charge - a much greater standard of evidence required